State v. Turnipseed’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
78 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 78 later decisions — most recently April 2018 · most notably Hankins v. State (1983), Hebron v. State (1993)
78 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Holland v. United States · Cree v. Goldstein · Gray v. United States · Duvall v. United States · State v. Merrill
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 78 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In reviewing a claim of insufficiency of the evidence, we are limited to ascertaining whether, given the facts in the record and the legitimate inferences that can be drawn from those facts, a jury could reasonably conclude that the defendant was guilty of the offense charged. We cannot retry the facts, but must take the view of the evidence most favorable to the state and must assume that the jury believed the state’s witnesses and disbelieved any contradictory evidence. If the jury, giving due regard to the presumption of innocence and to the state’s burden of proving the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, could reasonably have found the defendant guilty, that verdict will not be reversed.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Martinson · State v. Dahm“The reviewing court must examine the circumstances before the trial court at the time the motion was made to determine whether the trial court’s decision prejudiced defendant by materially affecting the outcome of the trial.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“A fact may be proved by either direct or circumstantial evidence, or by both. The law does not prefer one form of evidence over the other. Direct evidence is the testimony of a person who perceived the fact through his senses, and testifies to it, or physical evidence of the fact itself. Circumstantial evidence is indirect proof by proving one fact from which an inference of the existence of another fact may reasonably be drawn. Circumstantial evidence may be of the highest and most conclusive kind of proof, but in order to reach a conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt on circumstantial evidence alone, all circumstances proved must be consistent with that conclusion and inconsistent with any other rational conclusion.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.